How much of a premium would you pay for iPad 3 over iPad 2

Discussion in 'iPad' started by MacAttacka, Feb 28, 2012.


How much of a premium would you pay for iPad 3 over iPad

Poll closed Mar 6, 2012.
  1. iPad 2 - $399

  2. iPad 3 - $499

  3. iPad 3 - $549

  4. iPad 3 - $599

  5. iPad 3 - $599+

  1. MacAttacka, Feb 28, 2012
    Last edited: Feb 28, 2012

    MacAttacka macrumors 6502

    Feb 23, 2012
    Apple should be commended for retailing iPad 1 & 2 for $499 but there are rumors iPad 3 might buck that trend and retail a little higher.

    Assuming iPad 3 comes with a dual LED Retina, bigger battery and higher resolution camera, extra ram (all of which add to the cost) what would be the maximum you would you be willing to pay for a 16GB iPad SKU. To complicate matters lets add a cheaper $399 iPad 2 into the the mix as an option to create a value differential.

    1. iPad 2 - $399
    2. iPad 3 - $499
    3. iPad 3 - $549
    3. iPad 3 - $599
    4. iPad 3 - $599+

    I would personally be willing to pay up to $599. This would represent a $200 premium over the iPad 2 in this scenario (so that's $100 more than I paid for the actual iPad 2 last year) but for me that's better value for money with the hardware upgrade.

    Edit: I just to emphasise, we all want a high spec iPad 3 for $499 but this poll is to gauge your ceiling price if the price is higher.
  2. ChristianVirtual macrumors 601


    May 10, 2010
    Hope and vote for 549; but I believe I could not resist when higher price comes true ... The "want" factor for retina is just too high :eek:
  3. danny_w macrumors 601

    Mar 8, 2005
    Austin, TX
    None, the current model is everything I need and more.
  4. JUiCEJamie macrumors 6502a


    Mar 22, 2011
    It's a hard decision in the UK, because our prices for Apple devices are already pretty inflated.
    The $499 16Gb WiFi iPad 2 the US gets, works out to be around £320. Yet, Apple sells the entry level iPad in the UK at £399! An extra £80/$120.

    So the iPad 3 at something around $599? It's not going to be the accurate £380 it should be. It'll come in around £479 maybe?

    Not cool. - And the UK isn't the only market this is going to happen in either.
  5. iNotion macrumors regular


    Jun 5, 2008
    We need to pay extra for 'iPad3'
    because of retina display?!
  6. ArztMac macrumors regular


    Jul 22, 2011

    if the Retina Display is as good as I think it is (no compromise in terms of viewing angles or color reproduction), and if the battery is almost as good as the one in the iPad 2, I'd happily pay up to $2,000 or so for a 16GB WiFi version. Really.

    A display that great would just totally change my studying patterns, I would get rid of ALL my textbooks and solely switch, which is currently not possible as full textbook PDFs don't display well enough on current iPads.


    You are comparing apples to oranges.

    Always remember that US prices don't include VAT for products. VAT is always added at the counter and varies greatly from state to state. If you include VAT, the price of iPads increases to over $600 for the 16GB iPad in some states, which translates nicely to Euros or Pounds, where VAT is already included in the final price.

    People always forget this fact.
  7. GoCubsGo macrumors Nehalem


    Feb 19, 2005
    This. I don't get why anyone thinks we'd pay more for the iPad 3.
  8. urkel macrumors 68030

    Nov 3, 2008
    Good grief. Now we are making excuses for why we should pay MORE for the iPad 3? Technology is constantly moving forward and Apple is in a favorable position in that they profit in many areas beyond simply hardware sales. So rather than justifying why we should pay more, how about figuring out how people can pay less. Especially if we want students to really migrate from paper to iPad. (And now, iPad 2 isn't the EDU answer because handwriting/textbooks on a retina screen will bring a bigger benefit to them more than anyone else.

    I want all the (rumored) features of the iPad 3, but if it ends up costing more then I'll rebuy iPad 2 because that's still a killer machine that does everything I need..
  9. snow blind macrumors regular

    Mar 3, 2011
    This x2. The same parts Apple started using in the iPad 1 and still uses in the iPad 2 that will be shared with the iPad 3 are cheaper now. (Think certain structural & aesthetic pieces, minor electronics etc.) These and other factors allow them to retain a relatively similar (or even greater... Apple's not stupid) profit margin while still including the rumored upgrades of the iPad 3. I can't imagine them increasing the price... nor could I justify paying it.
  10. Doombringer macrumors regular

    Feb 13, 2012
    I wouldn't pay more than $1000 for the top of the line iPad 3. That means largest storage, 3G + Wifi.

    With the Retina display now included I'm looking at this being my tablet device for at least 2 to 3 years.
  11. 808? macrumors 6502a

    Aug 4, 2011
    Hong Kong
    Apple can charge whatever they like and they will still fly off the shelves faster than they can make them.
  12. Chris230291 macrumors member

    Feb 22, 2011
    I hope they charge 4x the price. That way no one will buy them, we can burry this tablet fad, and apple can continue to focus on OS X and the iPhone properly.
  13. SandboxGeneral Moderator emeritus


    Sep 8, 2010
    Considering that the iPad (along with the iPhone) brings in over 65% of Apple's revenue, we can safely assume that they aren't going to stop production of the iPad.

    To Beat the Law of Large Numbers, Apple Must Expand Its Product Line

  14. MacAttacka, Feb 28, 2012
    Last edited: Feb 28, 2012

    MacAttacka thread starter macrumors 6502

    Feb 23, 2012
    If you look at ifixit's BOM for iPad 1 & iPad 2 you'll see a lot of the components have pretty much the same price bracket and Apple's designs seem to be determined by the best component they can afford for the budget constraint.

    If the rumored specs are correct and it retails for $499, either key component costs have fallen dramatically over a year (i.e 1GB ram now costs the same as 512MB last year, retina screen dropped to XVGA's price last year, an 8MP camera dropped to last years 0.7MP camera price, the higher capacity battery dropped to last years standard capacity etc) or Apple are taking a major hit on their profit margins. Both are likely to have happened to some extent but maybe not enough to deliver that spec for that price.

    I know Apple can cut purchasing costs to the bone with their efficiency and buying power but I think asking for so many hardware improvements in a year for the same price as last year is a stretch.

    Im differentiating the price I would like to see it retail vs the price I think it will retail based on BOM. We all want it the same price as last year.

    Im guessing Apple's logic could be to lowered the iPad 2's price to sell in the lower end of the market and position iPad 3 as a cutting edge slightly premium machine. I dont think Apple could see the point of an iPad 3 without retina as the iPad 2 can still more than deliver. Let's see how many people refusing to pay above $499 change their minds when they see the device :)

    If it does retail higher it proves:
    1. Apple felt they could not deliver this high spec for $499 this year in which case we would have seen some form of "iPad2S" this year with a retina SKU more likely in iPad 4 next year.
    2. If this is a premium priced device then you can still pick up this SKU next year when Apple drop it by $100 for iPad4 so you still get the spec you want for the price you want but you end up waiting a year.
  15. Chris230291 macrumors member

    Feb 22, 2011
    Yeah i know it's just wishful thinking i guess. I just dont like the iPad, or any similar product. It fills a gap that i don't think needed filling. I'll use my macbook if im just chillin, my hackintosh if im doing something that requires concentration, and my iPhone if im on the move. I have an iPad here (first gen) and it just feels like a half assed device to me that just isn't needed.
  16. MacAttacka thread starter macrumors 6502

    Feb 23, 2012
    I have 32GB of comics and magazines scans from the 90's. They look Ok on the iPad 2 but it is nothing like reading on paper and you still have to zoom every page to read small text. So reading on an XGA screen is still like reading off of a computer monitor and that is no fun at all. A retina iPad would be well worth an extra $100 over the original $499 iPad 2 asking price for me and I am absolutely certain I could skip the next two or three iPad generations purely based on what the iPad 3 promises to deliver. If you look at the iPod Nano/Touch range you can see every now and then Apple delivers a killer device and but can then often struggle to follow it up with anything majorly compelling, sometimes even going back a step.
  17. JUiCEJamie macrumors 6502a


    Mar 22, 2011
    That's true. Sorry. Completely forgot about that! Phew.
  18. Tigger11 macrumors 6502

    Jul 2, 2009
    Rocket City, USA
    Taxes aren't really that big

    First of all we don't have a VAT, we have state sales taxes in 40 of the states (none in the other 10 or 17+ if you count like the president). The Highest combined state+county+local sales tax happens in a couple of cities in Arizona which charge 15% (in 2011), 98% of Americans pay less then 10%, and none pay 20+%, so noone pays over $600 for the $499 iPad in the US from a retailer. For instance, I pay 8% here in Rocket City.



    I really dont understand this attitude (though you arent the only one with it). The iPad is an incredibly popular device that makes Apple Billions of dollars a quarter, why exactly if you want Apple to continue to grow, make new products and have lots of money for R&D, do you want them to abandon a product like that. I don't have an Iphone (because the difference between an AT&T phone and a rock at my house is the rock gets as good reception but the snakes and coyotes are more scared of rocks), but I surely wouldnt suggest them stop making the iPhone, hopefully TMobile will get it this year and my android phone can get thrown at a coyote.
  19. Chris230291 macrumors member

    Feb 22, 2011
    Yeah i realise that they make a lot of money from selling the ipad, but that doesn't mean i have to like it. I understand why they should keep it from an OS X point of view, but then i dont like where thats going now :/. I guess im just falling out with apple.
  20. Macdude2010 macrumors 65816


    Mar 17, 2010
    The Apple Store
    ill pay whatever the top of the line model costs, as long as its under $1000 without tax
  21. SammyDFG macrumors member

    Aug 11, 2008
    why wouldn't you include the rumored price of $579 in your poll
  22. flyguy206 macrumors 6502a

    Aug 5, 2008
    I would pay no more then i did for the 1&2. Why would you pay more for the ipad then you did last year?
  23. iPad-Lover macrumors member

    Aug 8, 2010
    Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)

    Prices drop every year when new technology comes out, I wont be fussed if they add 30 pounds on to the ipad though because you are getting a great deal. Respectively I think they will add a bit of a chunk to the ipad's price. If they kept the price the same I will be shocked
  24. davedvdy macrumors 6502

    Oct 25, 2011
    I'm willing to pay extra if the screen gets that enhancement, but of course hoping not to.

Share This Page